In 1972 when Congress passed and Nixon signed the P.L. 92-603 that amended the Social Security Act to extend Medicare coverage to people with kidney failure, Congress did so because those lobbying for the law told them that doing so would help more people be able to afford an expensive treatment that would keep them alive and allow them to keep working or return to work. In those days, most patients were young white males who were employed and insured. Children and the elderly were not dialyzed. Neither were people with other serious illnesses. Some people faced selection committees that selected who would live and who would die.
As demographics of the ESRD population changed from young mostly healthy working males with no other health conditions to the population that is on dialysis today, the number of working ESRD patients has dropped. In case you haven’t been able to tell from my other posts, I am a rehabilitation evangelist and believe that ESRD treatment is often not “adequate” enough and there are barriers that the system itself erects that keep people from working. My goal and the goal of people like me is to help more patients keep their jobs and feel well enough to work or at least to return them to at or near their level of functioning before kidney failure.
The reason why the social worker asks you if you are working for pay is that once a year a report must be filed with the government that tells how many patients (not by name) ages of 18 through 54 are working for pay. If you started dialysis or if you got a transplant before dialysis in the U.S. in the last ten years or so, you were asked questions about your work status now and 6 months before. The categories on that form are: unemployed, working full-time, working part-time, homemaker, retired due to age/disability, retired (disabled), medical leave of absence, and student. Here’s the link to the current form:
One reason for asking these questions is to see how good a job the ESRD community is doing at returning people to their previous level of functioning. If someone was working 6 months before and continues to work or returns to work after taking time off to adjust to kidney failure, one can assume that the treatment team is doing a good job of providing the best treatment possible for that patient in the setting that makes work possible. On the other hand, if the person was working full-time before and now is retired disabled, perhaps there are things that the treatment team could be doing to improve the physical, emotional, and vocational well-being of that patient and to reduce treatment barriers.
I would love to see the federal government ask about the other categories of employment as well and have repeatedly asked for that. In my opinion, if the person was a homemaker before and is still taking care of his/her home and children, in my book, that’s rehab. The same is true if someone was previously retired and still enjoys retirement activities or those who were students and are still in school. The goal of dialysis should be to not just take care of kidneys, but to care for the whole person and empower him or her to achieve the maximum level of functioning possible.
Another goal is to show the federal government that the ESRD program – that in 2004 cost over $15.6 billion to care for 320,404 dialysis patients and 10,602 transplant patients – is doing its best to fulfill the promise of what Congress was told back in 1972…to keep people working or helping them return to work where they could be tax paying citizens. Here’s a brief summary of the data for the ESRD program:
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ESRDGeneralInformation/Downloads/2004ProgramHighlights.pdf
Please don’t take it personally when your social worker asks you these questions. If you’re not doing as well or nearly as well as you were doing prior to kidney failure, in my opinion, it’s an indictment of the renal community. We are not providing optimal dialysis, helping people to access the resources they need, and not offering enough people treatment options (home dialysis and transplant) that would allow more people fulfill their goals and dreams.